I see, and that’s why the Soviet team won the six-game Summit Series (3 wins and a tie) againstTeam Canada of NHL players in 1972?
I wasn’t referring to Miracle on Ice, I was thinking about those Soviet and Czech teams of the 60s and 70s—it is a team sport so those teams (who played together for years) playing NHL all-stars gathered for just the Olympics (and playing on the bigger Olympic ice) would have been great matchups.
As I said, the Soviets would have won a lot of those tournaments!
But the mid 70s teams were the best of the best of the 1956-wall falls down era!
But they never did play the Canada teams of the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s in the Olympics.
And even the Czechoslovakians did not have their best team in 80 and 84... as:
The Stastny brothers, Nedomansky, Hlinka, Bubla, Frycer, Crha, Ihnacak... all missed Olympics due to the amateur rules.
And in turn those medals mattered less everywhere than was not the Soviet Union tbh. It was never a best on best until 1988.
I do wish the NHL were less prickish right now and we had a best on best Olympics again... because yeh, right now it is back to being pretty irrelevant sadly.
Best-on-best I think is what matters most in Olympic prestige... where sports are clearly best on best? They are the pinnacle of the sport or close... where they are not? Or they kind of are but were preceded (pre-88) by a best-on-best tournament/event in the same sport? Then it is generally more of a "2nd rate" event.
Cycling is somewhere in-between I would say. Given close to best on best, but not quite, and has not been around as long as almost all the top ~20 races in a "proper best-on-best" guise.